Bishop Athanasius Schneider incoherent and confused

MAY 8, 2017

Bishop Athanasius Schneider incoherent and confused

Bishop Athanasius Schneider contradicts himself in the interview he recently gave to a Polish Catholic daily mainstream paper.

Like the SSPX bishops he does not state the obvious, which is, invisible-for-us- baptism of desire is not visible for us. So it is not an explicit exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) as it was known to the 16th century missionaries.

For him it is an exception.

So he contradicts himself in the interview he recently gave to a Polish daily.

He accepts the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston which assumed invisible cases are visible. They are exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Bishop Schneider says 'There is no other religion which saves man, except the Catholic Church.'However he is also saying that there are other religions in which non Catholics can be saved and so are saved.
So for him there are known cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.Theologically the bishop is denying the exclusivist ecclesiology of the past. He has adopted the New Theology based on invisible cases being visible.Then he infers that these 'visible invisible' cases are relevant and exceptions to EENS.

So for him theoretically there can be non Catholic cultures and civilizations in which a non Catholic can be saved and so these theoretical cases are explicit exceptions in 2017 to the dogma EENS. All do not need to formally enter the Church in 2017 for him.

According to the new theology it may not even be necessary to have explicit faith in Jesus for salvation.So Bishop Robert Barron suggests most people are saved even though they are not in the Catholic Church.

This was the reasoning in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. It was also the reasoning of Cardinal Richard Cushing and the Jesuits at Vatican Council II, especially when they composed Nostra Aetate.

So if invisible for us baptism of desire can be an exception to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS, then the Church is saying; the present magisterium is saying 'There are other religions in which non Catholics are saved and they are saved by the Catholic Church. So every body does not need to be a member of the Catholic Church any more. There is salvation outside the Church.For example invisible for us baptism of desire is known salvation outside the Church. Hypothetical cases of being saved in invincible ignorance are concrete exceptions to the interpretation of the dogma EENS as it was known to the 16th century magisterium '.

So theologically the bishop is saying not every one in 2017 needs to formally enter the Church for salvation.He contradicts himself.

He is supported by the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 and 1257 which assumes hypothetical cases are exceptions to the dogma EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.

This is the New Theology. It is philosophically based on invisible cases being visible, what is hypothetical being defacto known.It is based on philosophical subjectivism which suggests we can decide who are explicit exceptions to the dogma EENS as it was known over the centuries.We can judge.

Archbishop Augustine Di Noia in an interview with Edward Pentin for theNational Catholic Registerconfirmed this. He interpreted Lumen Gentium 8 (elements of sancitification and truth) as referring to known cases among his Protestants friends, who he believed would go to Heaven even though they were not Catholics.He could subjectively judge.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider accepted silently what Pope Benedict said in March 2016.He said the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is no more like it was in the 16th century.So he is a Cushingite like Pope Benedict and Pope Francis.

Pope Benedict said that there was a development of the dogma with Vatican Council II. He meant that Vatican Council II ( LG 16)etc interpreted with Cushingism contradicted the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This has been accepted by Bishop Schneider.For him too LG 16 refers to objective, explicit, seen in the flesh cases in 2017 who have been saved outside the Church, they have been saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).The irrational inference is part of Bishop Schneider's theology too.

So even though he says' there is no other religion which saves man, except the Catholic Church, because the Catholic Church is the unique Church of God, because the Church is the living Christ Himself ', he means there are exceptions .There are known exceptions for him. Some people do not need to enter the Church for salvation for him. The baptism of water is not necessary for salvation for some people, according to him.Some people do not need to be members of the Church for salvation since they could be saved in invicible ignorance or the baptism of desire...

He does not say 'there is no other religion which saves man, except the Catholic Church, because the Catholic Church is the unique Church of God, because the Church is the living Christ Himself. Jesus Christ is really corporally risen from the dead and there are no known exceptions in 2017, there cannot be any known exception in 2017. The baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century.There is only the ordinary means of salvation and there is no extra ordinary way. Since we humans cannot know of an extraordinary way of salvation.'

If he said this then he would be coherent.

However he would then be saying that the present magisterium of the two popes has made a factual error.They should have interpreted Vatican Council II and all magisterial documents with Feeneyism( invisible cases are invisible) instead of Cushingism ( invisible cases are physically visible).

He chose not to interpret Vatican Council II with Feeneyism. He does not state that invisible cases cannot be exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc cannot be exceptions to esclusive salvation in the Church.
Vatican Council II cannot be an exception to the old exclusivis ecclesioloy of the Church which he has affirmed in the interview to the Polish paper.

He did not tell the Polish people that there is no development of the dogma as Pope John Paul II also may have wrongly assumed.He did not contradict the statement of Pope Benedict in March 2016.For him there is a development of the dogma EENS with Vatican Council II.Pope John Paul II was not wrong for him.

So theologically Bishop Athansius Schneider contradicts himself. He also interprets Vatican Council II with an irrationality. He isnot really affirming the Faith theologically.His reasoning is the same as the liberals and Masons on this issue.He does not find fault with my interpretation of Vatican Council II and nor has he corrected me over the last six or seven years.

He criticizes correctly the subjectivity in Amoris Laeititia.However he uses this same subjectivity to assume there are known cases of the baptism of desire etc.He judges. He infers.He assumes. He presumes.He contradicts.For him there are known exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is a lack of coherence in his otherwise welcome statements.

He opposes subjectivity in moral theology but not in salvation theology.

When he says 'there is no other religion which saves man, except the Catholic Church, because the Catholic Church is the unique Church of God, because the Church is the living Christ Himself. Jesus Christ is really corporally risen from the dead', he could mean all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church. This is the liberal theology of Pope Benedict.This is the Rahner-Ratzinger New Theology.
It is an attempt to replace the past ecclesiocentrism with a new theology based on an irrationality. It has worked.Bishop Schneider has falled for it.

The New Theology infers that there are known cases of people saved with the baptism of desire etc and without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. So every one does not need to enter the Church as members, but only 'those who know'.This is a new theology which creates
a new doctrine.It is magisterial.It is not guided by the Holy Spirit.The Holy Spirit cannot create a theology based on a philosophical error, a factual mistake. The Holy Spirit will not contradict the teachings of the past centuries by violating the Principle of Non Contradiction and causing a split between faith and reason as we have known it throughout the centuries.

So the New Theology creates a new doctrine which says not every one needs to formally enter the Catholic Church to avoid Hell but only those who know.

Or, every one needs to enter the Church for salvation except for those in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire and blood.

Or, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'(Nicene Creed) and this includes being saved with the 'seeds of the Word(AG 11), imperfect communion with the church'(UR 3) elements of sanctification and truth(LG 8) etc, all without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

Or, outside the Church there is no salvation but a Protestant can be saved in his religion through Jesus and the Church.

Or, since there is known salvation outside the church every one does not need convert, there could be thousands of people saved outside the Church,may be even most people and it would be known only to God.

Etc, etc.The can of worms has been opened with invisible cases being visible.-Lionel Andrades

MAY 7, 2017

There is no other religion which saves man, except the Catholic Church, because the Catholic Church is the unique Church of God, because the Church is the living Christ Himself. Jesus Christ is really corporally risen from the dead - Bishop Athansius Schneider
eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/there-is-no-oth…